Personnel and Performance in University Science: Alignment of Management Incentives
https://doi.org/10.15826/umpa.2025.01.008
Abstract
This study examines the mechanisms through which research performance evaluations influence human resources in university-based science. Using a scoping review methodology, we analyzed domestic and international publications published since 2008. The findings demonstrate that research performance assessment serves as a component of science policy designed to facilitate goal attainment, a direct management tool influencing professional values and priorities, and a mechanism for personnel renewal. The effects of performance assessment are moderated by several factors, including: linkage of results to career advancement and funding, local implementation conditions, availability of teaching support programs, and disciplinary and professional status of researchers. Current performance improvement policies effectively support research community renewal and enhanced career mobility. However, they hinder staffing for high-risk / breakthrough research, maintenance of research traditions and continuity, and training of new researchers. The study identifies incentive conflicts that manifest through disruption of established knowledge production practices, assignment of research functions to non-specialized staff, emergence of unethical productivity-enhancing practices. We recommend developing systematic approaches to mitigate these contradictions through identification and analysis of existing measures that reduce negative impacts of performance assessments on human capital.
About the Author
I. G. Lakizo
Russian Research Institute of Economics, Politics and Law in Science and Technology
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Irina G. Lakizo – PhD (Pedagogical Sciences), Researcher of the Laboratory of Scientometrics and Scientific Communications
References
1. Flanagan K., Ribeiro B., Ferri P. AI and scientific productivity: Considering policy and governance challenges. In: Artificial Intelligence in Science: Challenges, Opportunities and the Future of Research, OECD, 2023, pp. 271–278. doi 10.1787/84cde28b-en. (In Eng.).
2. Andreeva E. L., Zakharova V. V., Ratner A. V. Rol’ gosudarstvennoi nauchno-tekhnicheskoi politiki v sotsial’no-ehkonomicheskom razvitii RF i ee regionov [Role of the state scientific and technical policy in social and economic development of Russia and its regions]. Vestnik Orenburgskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta, 2014, vol. 4 (165), pp. 39–44. (In Russ.).
3. Morrish L. Pressure Vessels: The epidemic of poor mental health among higher education staff. Oxford, 2019. 76 p. (In Eng.).
4. Emelyanova Е., Lapochkina В. Nauchnye kadry Rossii: tendentsii, problemy, perspektivy [Scientific Personnel of Russia: Trends, Problems, Prospects]. Zhurnal «EKO», 2022, vol. 4 (52), pp. 31–56. doi 10.30680/ECO0131-7652-2022-431-56. (In Russ.).
5. Ermolaeva S. G. Razvitie universitetskogo soobshchestva v regional’nykh universitetakh v usloviyakh akademicheskogo menedzherializma [Development of the university community in regional universities in the conditions of academic managerialism]. Vestnik Nizhegorodskogo universiteta im. N. I. Lobachevskogo. Seriya «Sotsial’nye nauki», 2021, vol. 4, pp. 120–126. doi 10.52452/18115942_2021_4_120. (In Russ.).
6. Pasport federal’nogo proekta «Razvitie chelovecheskogo kapitala v interesah regionov, otraslej i sektora issledovanij i razrabotok» [Passport of the federal project “Development of human capital in the interests of regions, industries and the research and development sector”], available at: https:// minobrnauki.gov.ru/upload/2021/09/КАДРЫ.PDF (accessed 28.01.2025). (In Russ.).
7. Kakuyu podderzhku mogut poluchit’ molodye uchenye? [What support can young scientists receive?] Ministerstvo nauki i vysshego obrazovaniya Rossijskoj Federacii. Nacional’nye proekty. Voprosy i otvety [Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Russian Federation. National projects. Questions and answers], available at: https:// minobrnauki.gov.ru/nac_project/#goals (accessed 28.01.2025). (In Russ.).
8. Komolikova E. V. Struktura kadrovyh resursov organizacij [Structure of human resources of organizations]. Nauchno-metodicheskij elektronnyj zhurnal «Koncept», 2017, vol. 39, pp. 3366–3370. (In Russ.).
9. Gläser J. From Effects of Governance to Causes of Epistemic Change. Minerva, 2024, vol. 62, pp. 309–337. doi 10.1007/s11024-024-09526-2. (In Eng.).
10. Hicks D. What year? Difficulties in identifying the effect of policy on university output. Journal of Informetrics, 2017, vol. 3 (11), pp. 933–936. doi 10.1016/j.joi.2017.05.020. (In Eng.).
11. Sanzhenakov A. A. Prichinnost’ v sotsial’nykh naukakh [Causallity in social sciences]. Filosofiya nauki, 2023, vol. 2 (97), pp. 59–73. doi 10.15372/PS20230205. (In Russ.).
12. Lokshin I. M. Vse ob”yasnyaetsya vsem? Nekotorye ehpistemologicheskie i metodologicheskie vyzovy dlya sovremennoi politicheskoi nauki [Is everything explained? Some epistemological and methodological challenges to contemporary political science]. Politicheskaya kontseptologiya: Zhurnal metadistsiplinarnykh issledovanii, 2017, vol. 1, pp. 25–40. (In Russ.).
13. Berezhnova V. E. Konstruirovanie soderzhaniya obrazovaniya v processe transformacii akademicheskoj Professii [Construction of the content of education in the process of transformation of the academic profession]. Obrazovatel’nye tekhnologii, 2017, vol. 4, pp. 19–24. (In Russ.).
14. Nazarova I. B. Kadrovye strategii rossijskih vuzov liderov: plany i realizaciya [HR strategies of leading universities: plans and implementation]. Moscow, 2011, 80 p. (In Russ.).
15. Zajceva E.V., Voronina L. I. Kadrovyj potencial universitetov: chto dal’she? [Universities’ Human Resource Potential: What’s Next?]. In: Strategii razvitiya social’nyh obshchnostej, institutov i territorij: materialy VIII Mezhdunarodnoj nauchnoprakticheskoj konferencii (Ekaterinburg, 18-19 aprelya 2022 g.) [Development Strategies of Social Communities, Institutions and Territories: materials of the international scientific and practical conference], Ekaterinburg, 2022, pp. 307–312. (In Russ.).
16. Butler L. Impacts of performance-based research funding systems: A review of the concerns and the evidence. In: Performance-based Funding for Public Research in Tertiary Education Institutions: Workshop Proceedings, Paris, 2010, P. 127–165. doi 10.1787/9789264094611-7-en. (In Eng.).
17. De Rijcke S., Wouters P. F., Rushforth A. D., Franssen T. P., Hammarfelt B. Evaluation practices and effects of indicator use-a literature review. Research Evaluation, 2016, vol. 2 (25), pp. 161–169. doi 10.1093/reseval/rvv038. (In Eng.).
18. Thomas D. A., Nedeva M., Tirado M. M., Jacob M. Changing research on research evaluation: A critical literature review to revisit the agenda. Research Evaluation, 2020, vol. 3 (29), pp. 275–288. doi 10.1093/reseval/rvaa008. (In Eng.).
19. Hinojoza H. M. C., Martínez A. E. V., Gómez A. E. R., Regalado C. D. B. La pérdida de la membresía del Sistema Nacional de Investigadores: Hallazgos de investigación. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 2020, (28), pp. 178–178. doi 10.14507/epaa.28.4997. (In Span.).
20. Saith A. Research Assessment Exercises: Exorcising Heterodox Apostasy from ‘Economics’. In: Palgrave Studies in the History of Economic Thought, Springer International Publishing, 2022, pp. 965–1017. doi 10.1007/978-3-030-930196_13. (In Eng.).
21. Chubb J., Reed M. S. The politics of research impact: academic perceptions of the implications for research funding, motivation and quality. British Politics, 2018, vol. 3 (13), pp. 295–311. doi 10.1057/s41293-018-0077-9. (In Eng.).
22. Abramov R. N., Gruzdev I. A., Terent’ev E. A. Akademicheskii professionalizm v ehpokhu peremen: rolevye subidentichnosti i transformatsiya byudzhetov vremeni [Academic professionalism in the era of change: sub-identities and transformation of time budgets]. Monitoring obshchestvennogo mneniya: ekonomicheskie i sotsial’nye peremeny, 2015, vol. 6 (130), pp. 136–152. doi 10.14515/monitoring.2015.6.08. (In Russ.).
23. Zborovsky G. E., Ambarova P. A. Nauchnopedagogicheskie rabotniki kak sotsial’naya obshchnost’ v menyayushchikhsya usloviyakh akademicheskogo razvitiya [Scientific and pedagogical staff as a social community in the changing conditions of academic development]. Obrazovanie i nauka, 2022, vol. 5 (24), pp. 147–180. doi 10.17853/1994-56392022-5-147-180. (In Russ.).
24. Tijdink J. K., Verbeke R., Smulders Y. M. Publication Pressure and Scientific Misconduct in Medical Scientists. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics, 2014, vol. 5 (9), pp. 64–71. doi 10.1177/1556264614552421. (In Eng.).
25. Bagues M., Sylos-Labini M., Zinovyeva N. A walk on the wild side: ‘Predatory’ journals and information asymmetries in scientific evaluations. Research Policy, 2019, vol. 2 (48), pp. 462–477. doi 10.1016/j.respol.2018.04.013. (In Eng.).
26. Feenstra R.A., Delgado López-Cózar E., PallarésDomínguez D. Research Misconduct in the Fields of Ethics and Philosophy: Researchers’ Perceptions in Spain. Science and Engineering Ethics, 2021, vol. 1 (27). doi 10.1007/s11948021-00278-w. (In Eng.).
27. Abramo G., D’Angelo C. A., Di Costa F. When research assessment exercises leave room for opportunistic behavior by the subjects under evaluation. Journal of Informetrics, 2019, vol. 3 (13), pp. 830–840. doi 10.1016/j.joi.2019.07.006. (In Eng.).
28. Paruzel-Czachura M., Baran L., Spendel Z. Publish or be ethical? Publishing pressure and scientific misconduct in research. Research Ethics, 2021, vol. 3 (17), pp. 375–397. doi 10.1177/1747016120980562. (In Eng.).
29. Müller L., Schneijderberg C. The Emergence of the Organizational Academic Profession: Vertical differentiation of German universities and the research-teaching nexus. Higher Education Forum, 2020, vol. 17, pp. 43–68. doi 10.15027/48954. (In Eng.).
30. Temnitskiy A. L. Motivatsiya i problema produktivnosti nauchnoi deyatel’nosti rossiiskikh uchenykh [Russian scientists’ motivation and research performance issue]. Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya, 2024, vol. 3, pp. 28–43. doi 10.31857/S0132162524030033. (In Russ.).
31. Weinstein N., Haddock G., Chubb J., Wilsdon J., Manville C. Supported or stressed while being assessed? How motivational climates in UK University workplaces promote or inhibit researcher well-being. Higher Education Quarterly, 2023, vol. 3 (77), pp. 537–557. doi 10.1111/hequ.12420. (In Eng.).
32. Martin-Sardesai A., Irvine H., Tooley S., Guthrie J. Accounting for Research: Academic Responses to Research Performance Demands in an Australian University: Accounting for Research. Australian Accounting Review, 2017, vol. 3 (27), pp. 329–343. doi 10.1111/auar.12151. (In Eng.).
33. Lewis J. M., Ross S. Research funding systems in Australia, New Zealand and the UK: policy settings and perceived effects. Policy & Politics, 2011, vol. 3 (39), pp. 379– 398. doi 10.1332/030557310X520270. (In Eng.).
34. Mula-Falcón J., Caballero K. Academics’ perceptions regarding performance evaluations and the consequences for their professional and personal activity. Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education, 2023, vol. 7 (17), pp. 97–113. doi 10.1108/JARHE-05-2023-0183. (In Eng.).
35. Zhao X., Yin H., Fang C., Liu X. For the Sustainable Development of Universities: Exploring the External Factors Impacting Returned Early Career Academic’s Research Performance in China. Sustainability, 2021, vol. 3 (13), p. 1333. doi 10.3390/su13031333. (In Eng.).
36. Liu Q., Zheng S., Gui C., Wang X. Analysis of Scholars’ Comments on Breaking Through the Evaluation Criteria Based on Four Only. Journal of Library and Information Science in Agriculture, 2021, vol. 10 (33), pp. 45–58. doi 10.13998/j. cnki.issn1002-1248.20-0961. (In Chin.).
37. Gruzdev I., Abramov R., Terentev E. Under Pressure: Transformation of Academic Work and Discourse in a GloballyOriented Russian University: Case of National Research University Higher School of Economics. Higher Education in Russia and Beyond, 2016, vol. 7 (1), pp. 18–19. (In Eng.).
38. Yudkevich M. Rossiiskaya akademicheskaya professiya i postroenie peredovykh universitetov [The Russian academic profession and the building of advanced universities]. Otechestvennye zapiski, 2013, vol. 4 (55), pp. 1–8. (In Russ.).
39. Kozmina Y. Predpochteniya prepodavatelei vuzov otnositel’no nauchnoi deyatel’nosti i prepodavaniya [Professors’ Preferences about Research and Teaching]. Voprosy obrazovaniya, 2014, vol. 3, pp. 135–151. doi 10.17323/1814-9545-2014-3-135-151. (In Russ.).
40. Sivak E., Yudkevich M. Akademicheskaya professiya v sravnitel’noi perspektive: 1992–2012 [Academic Profession in a Comparative Perspective: 1992–2012]. Foresight, 2013, vol. 3 (7), pp. 38–47. doi 10.17323/1995-459X.2013.3.38.47. (In Russ.).
41. Gusev A. B., Yurevich M. A. Nauchnaya politika Rossii – 2021 [Russian science policy – 2021], Мoscow, 2021, 96 p. (In Russ.).
42. Heuritsch J. Knowledge Utilization and Open Science Policies: Noble aims that ensure quality research or Ordering discoveries like a pizza? In: International Astronautical Congress, 2019, 10 p. doi 10.48550/arXiv.2005.14021. (In Eng.).
43. Heuritsch J. Reflexive Behaviour: How Publication Pressure Affects Research Quality in Astronomy. Publications, 2021, vol. 4 (9), pp. 52. doi 10.3390/publications9040052. (In Eng.).
44. Matveeva N., Sterligov I., Yudkevich M. The effect of Russian University Excellence Initiative on publications and collaboration patterns. Journal of Informetrics, 2021, vol. 1 (15), pp. 101110. doi 10.1016/j.joi.2020.101110. (In Eng.).
45. Shibanova E. Yu., Platonova D. P., Lisyutkin M. A. Proekt 5-100: Dinamika i patterny razvitiya universitetov [Project 5-100: Dynamics and development patterns of universities]. Universitetskoe upravlenie: praktika i analiz, 2018, vol. 3, pp. 32–48. doi 10.15826/umpa.2018.03.025. (In Russ.).
46. Trubnikova E. I. Obmen darami v akademicheskoi srede: khishchnicheskie praktiki, lozhnye signaly i konflikt interesov v programmakh prevoskhodstva [The Exchange of Gifts in the Academic Sphere: Predatory Practices, False Signals, and Conflicts of Interest in Excellence Programs]. Mir Rossii. Sotsiologiya. Etnologiya, 2022, vol. 1 (31), pp. 25–48. doi 10.17323/1811-038X-2022-31-1-25-48. (In Russ.).
47. Kosyakov D. V., Guskov A. E. Synchronous scientific mobility and international collaboration: case of Russia. In: Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Scientometrics and Informetrics (ISSI-2019) (2–5 September 2019, Rome, Italy), Rome, 2019, pp. 1319–1328. (In Eng.).
48. Kosyakov D., Guskov A. Impact of national science policy on academic migration and research productivity in Russia. Procedia Computer Science, 2019, (146), pp. 60– 71. doi 10.1016/j.procs.2019.01.080. (In Eng.).
49. Abramo G., D’Angelo C. A., Grilli L. The effects of citation-based research evaluation schemes on self-citation behavior. Journal of Informetrics, 2021, vol. 4 (15), pp. 101204. doi 10.1016/j.joi.2021.101204. (In Eng.).
50. Buckle R. A., Creedy J. Methods to evaluate institutional responses to performance-based research funding systems. Australian Economic Papers, 2022, vol. 3 (61), pp. 615–634. doi 10.1111/1467-8454.12263. (In Eng.).
51. Macfarlane B. The CV as a symbol of the changing nature of academic life: performativity, prestige and selfpresentation. Studies in Higher Education, 2020, vol. 4 (45), pp. 796–807. doi 10.1080/03075079.2018.1554638. (In Eng.).
52. Ablazhey А. Reformirovanie akademicheskogo sektora nauki v otsenkakh nauchnogo soobshchestva [Reforming the Academic Sector of Science as Evaluated by the Academic Community]. Zhurnal «EKO», 2022, vol. 8 (52), pp. 173–192. doi 10.30680/ECO0131-7652-2022-8-173-192. (In Russ.).
53. Zinkovskiy K. V., Khlebovich D. I. Kadrovaya politika vuzov v usloviyakh institutsional’nykh izmenenii: differentsiatsiya ili unifikatsiya? [Personnel policy in universities in dynamic institutional environment: differentiation or standardization?]. Universitetskoe upravlenie: praktika i analiz, 2014, vol. 4–5 (92–93), pp. 138–148. (In Russ.).
54. Drugova E. A., Pleshkevich I. B., Klimova T. V. Transformatsiya kadrovoi politiki rossiiskikh universitetovuchastnikov Proekta 5-100: keis NIYAU MIFI [Transformation of the Personnel Policy of Russian Universities Participating in Project 5–100: The Case of NRNU MEPhI]. Vysshee obrazovanie v Rossii, 2021, vol. 6 (30), pp. 9–26. doi 10.31992/0869-3617-2021-30-6-9-26. (In Russ.).
55. Neff M. W. Williams and Morrone misunderstand and inadvertently support my argument: Mexico’s SNI systematically steers ecological research. Science and Public Policy, 2019, vol. 1 (46), pp. 154–158. doi 10.1093/scipol/scy031. (In Eng.).
56. Naumenko O. N. Ideya i soderzhanie «Proekta 5-100»: iz opyta Tyumenskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta [Idea and contents of “Project 5–100”: from experience of the Tyumen state university]. Gumanizatsiya obrazovaniya, 2015, vol. 6, pp. 51–56. (In Russ.).
57. Woelert P., Yates L. Too little and too much trust: performance measurement in Australian higher education. Critical Studies in Education, 2015, vol. 2 (56), pp. 175–189. doi 10.1080/17508487.2014.943776. (In Eng.).
58. Shao J., Shen H. Research assessment and monetary rewards: the overemphasized impact factor in China. Research Evaluation, 2012, vol. 3 (21), pp. 199–203. doi 10.1093/reseval/ rvs011. (In Eng.).
59. Otley D. Research Assessment in the UK: An Overview of 1992-2008. Australian Accounting Review, 2010, vol. 1 (20), pp. 3–13. doi 10.1111/j.1835-2561.2010.00074.x. (In Eng.).
60. Brazil R. The human costs of the research-assessment culture. Nature, 2024, vol. 8029 (633), pp. 481–484. doi 10.1038/ d41586-024-02922-4. (In Eng.).
61. Kulikowski K., Przytuła S., Sułkowski Ł. ‘Homo Metricus’: The New Academic Worker. How Quantitative Research Evaluation Practices Reshape the Intellectual Capital Needed to Succeed in Contemporary Universities? Higher Education Policy, 2024. doi 10.1057/s41307-024-00383-y. (In Eng.).
62. Chou C. P., Lin H. F., Chiu Y. The impact of SSCI and SCI on Taiwan’s academy: an outcry for fair play. Asia Pacific Education Review, 2013, vol. 1 (14), pp. 23–31. doi 10.1007/ s12564-013-9245-1. (In Eng.).
63. Lakizo I. G., Gus’kov A. E. Ehvolyutsiya otsenki nauchnoi rezul’tativnosti v Kitae [The evolution of research evaluation in China]. Vestnik Rossijskoj akademii nauk, 2023, vol. 4 (93), pp. 329–341. doi 10.31857/S0869587323040047. (In Russ.).
64. Holligan C. Feudalism and academia: UK academics’ accounts of research culture. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 2011, vol. 1 (24), pp. 55– 75. doi 10.1080/09518398.2010.485134. (In Eng.).
65. Tolochek V. A. Fenomen «professiya»: vozmozhnye izmereniya. Chast’ pervaya [The phenomenon of “profession”: Possible dimensions. Part 1]. Organizatsionnaya psikhologiya, 2024, vol. 3 (14), pp. 193–216. doi 10.17323/2312-5942-202414-3-193-216. (In Russ.).
66. Müller R., Rijcke S. de. Thinking with indicators. Exploring the epistemic impacts of academic performance indicators in the life sciences. Research Evaluation, 2017, vol. 3 (26), pp. 157–168. doi 10.1093/reseval/rvx023. (In Eng.).
67. Gómez L., Jódar F. Ética y política en la universidad española: la evaluación de la investigación como tecnología de la subjetividad, Athenea Digital. Revista de pensamiento e investigación social, 2013, pp. 81–98. doi 10.5565/rev/athenead/v13n1.1169. (In Span.).
68. Abramova S. B. Faktory, opredelyayushchie vybor professii uchenogo [Factors determining the choice of a scientist’s profession]. Izvestiya Ural’skogo federal’nogo universiteta. Ser. 3, Obshchestvennye nauki, 2017, vol. 12, nr 3 (167), pp. 71–81. (In Russ.).
69. Horta H., Li H. Nothing but publishing: the overriding goal of PhD students in mainland China, Hong Kong, and Macau. Studies in Higher Education, 2023, vol. 2 (48), pp. 263– 282. doi 10.1080/03075079.2022.2131764. (In Eng.).
70. Chatterjee B., Cordery C. J., De Loo I., Letiche H. The spectacle of research assessment systems: insights from New Zealand and the United Kingdom. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 2020, vol. 6 (33), pp. 1219–1246. doi 10.1108/AAAJ-01-2019-3865. (In Eng.).
71. Saltmarsh S., Sutherland-Smith W., Randell-Moon H. ‘Inspired and assisted’, or ‘berated and destroyed’? Research leadershipp. management and performativity in troubled times. Ethics and Education, 2011, vol. 3 (6), pp. 293–306. doi 10.1080/17449642.2011.632722. (In Eng.).
72. Hangel N., Schmidt-Pfister D. Why do you publish? On the tensions between generating scientific knowledge and publication pressure. Aslib Journal of Information Management, 2017, vol. 5 (69), pp. 529–544. doi 10.1108/AJIM-01-2017-0019. (In Eng.).
73. Li J. The Global Ranking Regime and the Reconfiguration of Higher Education: Comparative Case Studies on Research Assessment Exercises in China, Hong Kong, and Japan. Higher Education Policy, 2016, vol. 4 (29), pp. 473–493. doi 10.1057/s41307-016-0015-7. (In Eng.).
74. Mcculloch S. Hobson’s choice: the effects of research evaluation on academics’ writing practices in England. Aslib Journal of Information Management, 2017, vol. 5 (69), pp. 503– 515. doi 10.1108/AJIM-12-2016-0216. (In Eng.).
75. Li D., Li Y. Preparing for RAE 2020 in Hong Kong: academics’ research, writing and publishing trajectories in a neoliberal governance landscape. Studies in Higher Education, 2022, vol. 7 (47), pp. 1410–1422. doi 10.1080/03075079.2021.1901272. (In Eng.).
76. Aagaard K. How incentives trickle down: Local use of a national bibliometric indicator system. Science and Public Policy, 2015, vol. 5 (42), pp. 725–737. doi 10.1093/scipol/scu087. (In Eng.).
77. Visser G. Tourism Geographies and the South African National Research Foundation’s Researcher Rating System: International Connections and Local Disjunctures. Tourism Geographies, 2009, vol. 1 (11), pp. 43–72. doi 10.1080/14616680802643243. (In Eng.).
78. Ackers L. Internationalisation, Mobility and Metrics: A New Form of Indirect Discrimination? Minerva, 2008, vol. 4 (46), pp. 411–435. doi 10.1007/s11024-008-9110-2. (In Eng.).
79. Karlsson S. Evaluation as a travelling idea: Assessing the consequences of Research Assessment Exercises. Research Evaluation, 2017, vol. 2 (26), pp. 55–65. doi 10.1093/reseval/ rvx001. (In Eng.).
80. Gao X., Zheng Y. «Heavy mountains» for Chinese humanities and social science academics in the quest for worldclass universities. Compare, 2020, vol. 4 (50), pp. 554–572. doi 10.1080/03057925.2018.1538770. (In Eng.).
81. Krog Lind J. The missing link: How university managers mediate the impact of a performance-based research funding system. Research Evaluation, 2019, vol. 1 (28), pp. 84–93. doi 10.1093/reseval/rvy038. (In Eng.).
82. Mrva-Montoya A., Luca E.J. Book Publishing in the Humanities and Social Sciences in Australia, Part One: Understanding Institutional Pressures and the Funding Context. Journal of Scholarly Publishing, 2021, vol. 2 (52), pp. 67–87. doi 10.3138/jsp.52.2.01. (In Eng.).
83. Bianco M., Gras N., Sutz J. Academic Evaluation: Universal Instrument? Tool for Development? Minerva, 2016, vol. 4 (54), pp. 399–421. doi 10.1007/s11024-016-9306-9. (In Eng.).
84. Kehm B. M. To Be or Not to Be? The Impacts of the Excellence Initiative on the German System of Higher Education. In: The Changing Academy – The Changing Academic Profession in International Comparative Perspective, Springer, 2013, pp. 81–97. doi 10.1007/978-94-007-4975-7_6. (In Eng.).
85. Oancea A. Research assessment as governance technology in the United Kingdom: findings from a survey of RAE 2008 impacts. Zeitschrift für Erziehungswissenschaft, 2014, vol. S6 (17), pp. 83–110. doi 10.1007/s11618-014-0575-5. (In Eng.).
86. Abramov R. N., Gruzdev I. A., Terent’ev E. A. Akademicheskaya professiya i ideologiya «medlennoi naukI» [Academic Profession and Ideology of “Slow Scholarship”]. Vysshee obrazovanie v Rossii, 2016, vol. 10, pp. 62–70. (In Russ.).
87. Pleshkevich I. B., Drugova E. A., Klimova T. V. Privlech’ i uderzhat’: osobennosti kadrovoi politiki vedushchikh rossiiskikh universitetov (keis DVFU) [Attract and Retain: Specifics of Personnel Policy of the Leading Russian Universities (FEFU Case)]. Sociologia nauki i tehnologij, 2021, vol. 4 (12), pp. 150–171. doi 10.24412/2079-0910-2021-4-150-171. (In Russ.).
88. Edgar F., Geare A. Factors influencing university research performance. Studies in Higher Education, 2013, vol. 38 (5), pp. 774–792. doi 10.1080/03075079.2011.601811. (In Eng.).
89. Teichler U., Arimoto A., Cummings W. K. The Changing Academic Profession: Major Findings of a Comparative Survey. Dordrecht, 2013, 260 p. doi 10.1007/978-94-007-6155-1. (In Eng.).
90. Linkova M. Unable to resist: Researchers’ responses to research assessment in the Czech Republic. Human Affairs, 2014, vol. 24, nr 1, pp. 78–88. (In Eng.).
91. Alekseev O. B., Alekhin A. S., Sanatov D. V., Baryshev R. A. Ispol’zovanie metoda regulirovaniya organizacionnogo balansa dlya transformacii upravleniya nauchnoj deyatel’nost’yu v universitete [Using the Organizational Balance Method for Transforming the Management of Scientific Activities in a University]. Universitetskoe upravlenie: praktika i analiz, 2024, vol. 28 (1), pp. 99–110. doi 10.15826/umpa.2024.01.007 (In Russ.).
92. Ambarova P. A., Zborovsky G. E. Nauchnopedagogicheskoe soobshchestvo v rossiiskikh vuzakh v usloviyakh osushchestvleniya programmy «Prioritet-2030»: problemy i perspektivy [Scientific and Pedagogical Community in Russian Universities in the Context of the Program «Priority-2030» Implementation: Problems and Prospects]. Vysshee obrazovanie v Rossii, 2022, vol. 1 (31), pp. 59–71. doi 10.31992/0869-3617-2022-31-1-59-71. (In Russ.).
Review
For citations:
Lakizo I.G. Personnel and Performance in University Science: Alignment of Management Incentives. University Management: Practice and Analysis. 2025;29(1):106–130. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.15826/umpa.2025.01.008
Views:
219
Email this article 